W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > January 2008

Re: non-http uris

From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:23:12 +0100
Message-ID: <47862A50.7080301@berkeley.edu>
To: uri@w3.org
CC: "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>

hello ray.

thanks a lot for you email.

>   I would suggest looking at the info: URI scheme,
> http://info-uri.info/registry/ and consider registering 'geoloc' (please
> don't call it 'loc') as an 'info:' namespace.   (An 'info:' namespace is
> analagous to a URN namespace.)   It seems to me that this geo-location
> sub-scheme is appropriate for use with 'info' though that would be something
> for the 'info URI Board (or whatever it's called) to decide, and if so,
> approval/registration is a fairly lightweight process (I can personally
> attest to that).  This approach would render the issue of a new URI scheme
> moot.

in a way, the whole discussion revolves around prefixes:

- i am thinking about a geoloc: prefix, thereby making locations a 
first-class web citizen.

- others are suggesting a http://geoloc.org/ prefix, pointing out that 
it would be better to have http for everything, so that web pages can be 
served.

- urn: would also be a possibility, but they are more of a legacy 
concept from the old url vs. urn days and the only real advantage would 
be a more lightweight registration process.

- info: seems to be the new urn:; i am not an info expert, but to me it 
looks as if the only real benefit is the easier registration process. 
other minor differences to urns seems to be that info: does not as 
strongly recommend that a info: uri should be mapped to a http: uri by 
some mapping process. and info: uris have structure, urn: uris are flat. 
and info: allows fragment identifiers.

info: to me looks better than urn:, but i still think that choosing a 
uri scheme for the ease of registration is kind of a weird way of 
deciding how to represent resource identifiers. and finally, 
http://info-uri.info/registry/OAIHandler?verb=ListRecords&metadataPrefix=oai_dc 
looks very much as if the library community just wanted to create their 
own registry for having an easier way of creating and managing 
sub-namespaces (is there a single non-library entry in there?). that is 
fine, but does not necessarily mean that this namespace should be used 
for everything non-http.

cheers,

dret.
Received on Thursday, 10 January 2008 14:23:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:40 GMT